Perhaps because I feel like there is some... I dunno, sense of awe that appears to be widespread to human beings who have lived a particular while. "This all happened! How fantastic! I'm a living being!" And I would understand this sense of grandeur in miniature things to be the whisperings of a god, if you like--the moments at which a human being could safely scrape up against divinity.
But at the same time, I don't understand why with one side of the mouth a person could say "I am open and forgiving and humble" and with the other side of the mouth a person could say "You are going to burn in hell for all eternity even though you haven't broken any of the things we both know to be sins." (you know, obvious moral wrongs)
-snip-
Movements atheists proselytize and argue much like the more irritating religious folks with whom I'm familiar (so, if you drop that you're a believer of any stripe in a conversation, such a person would consider it his responsibility to divest you of your faith then and there).
"Movement Atheists," huh? I never had those words until now, so thank you! The reason I started using the term Agnostic instead of Atheist to describe my beliefs is because I wanted to distance myself from that sort of behavior. Richard Dawkins, though his enthusiasm is wonderful, really bothers me for reasons I haven't explored. I think it's that he's a dogmatic, callous, proselytizing ass- many of the things he decries about organized religion. Spirituality or religion, in my experience, aren't the universal forces for ignorance and suffering he makes them out to be. Even if there is nothing like God out there, a spirituality can help heal and provide direction for people who are lost and hurt, and gives us training wheels for moral behavior.
And then there's that "widespread sense of awe" you mention. It seems pretty universal to the human experience, to feel like there's some aspect of the consciousness or the self that extends beyond the immediately material. I don't feel that I can both assume I'm just a small conglomeration of limited sensory organs and neurons, while at the same time assuming an objective and solid-enough vantage point on the universe to really know its nature. Maybe this sense of Grandeur -is- just an evolutionary adaptation to keep us sane, and keep us from succumbing to feelings of futility at life, as conscious beings capable of abstract thought. Maybe there is a spiritual, non-material component to the self, like an immortal soul that reincarnates or gets to chill with a bunch of naked winged babies, flaming wheels, and/or giant orbs of eyes and wings once we die.
I just can't reconcile assuming I'm just this bag of meat with a limited perspective, and also assume that this bag of meat has such an objective and amazing vantage on the universe to know what it, itself, is. The mirror cannot know itself.
-snip-
This, very much. Though I can't go so far as to say that volcanoes, trees, etc. don't have anything like a mind; there's no reason for me to suspect it, but I also don't like ruling things out unless I have proof.. and I don't understand the nature of consciousness nearly well enough to know where it can be ascribed. Best guess is it's a Brain-based thing, but I don't know
how the hell it even. Also, it's comforting to feel like I'm more than an illusion created as a short blip of activity by a lump of neurons, because that can make life feel really dark and lonely and futile sometimes... which runs at odds with how amazing and awesome life otherwise seems. I really liked when a friend of mine likened the brain to a "radio receiver, but for consciousness" in his spirituality.
I also don't like to rule out that sort of Animist consciousness thing because, if
Pele, or any sentient volcanoes are reading this, they probably can't type to prove their existence, and I'd like to stay on good terms. Mostly though, they're much bigger than I am, and I'd like not to be buried under a heap of ash and molten rock.